Home› Archived Forums› Politics
Options

Kurds say airstrikes not working

TheTruth1983TheTruth1983 Posts: 13,462
Forum Member
✭✭
in Politics #1
They continue their advance towards Turkey

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/05/air-strikes-isis-not-working-syrian-kurds

Who didn't see this coming?

When will Western governments learn that Islamic extremism will not be stopped in this way?
«1345

Comments

  • Options
    RaferRafer Posts: 14,231
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #2
    The problem is that if we send in ground forces. It becomes another West vs Islam conflict. That plays better to isis. If you're going to send in ground forces. Then it has to be Islamic nations providing them. The problem with that is that it runs a very real risk of becoming openly sectarian across the entire middle east.
  • Options
    TheTruth1983TheTruth1983 Posts: 13,462
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #3
    Rafer wrote: »
    The problem is that if we send in ground forces. It becomes another West vs Islam conflict. That plays better to isis. If you're going to send in ground forces. Then it has to be Islamic nations providing them. The problem with that is that it runs a very real risk of becoming openly sectarian across the entire middle east.

    Absolutely, that's why I think we should stay well away from a ground war if only for the cost while we have a massive debt and deficit (still).
  • Options
    Alan1981Alan1981 Posts: 5,416
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #4
    Why can't Arab Countries sort this out amongst themselves . It's not like they don't have the fire power. Isis are pretty bold at the minute, but if we go in, they will soon be hiding among civilians and we will be dragged into another Afghanistan and we will be blamed for any civilian casualties and the West will be hated even more than we are.

    This is the problem with removing dictators and trying to force some wishy washy style of democracy on people who are not ready for it and probably never will be.
  • Options
    tim59tim59 Posts: 47,188
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #5
    Alan1981 wrote: »
    Why can't Arab Countries sort this out amongst themselves . It's not like they don't have the fire power. Isis are pretty bold at the minute, but if we go in, they will soon be hiding among civilians and we will be dragged into another Afghanistan and we will be blamed for any civilian casualties and the West will be hated even more than we are.

    This is the problem with removing dictators and trying to force some wishy washy style of democracy on people who are not ready for it and probably never will be.

    I agree 100%, i believe that within 5 years afghanistan will be back to Tribal Wars, and back to Tribal Ways
  • Options
    rusty123rusty123 Posts: 22,872
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #6
    TheTruth1983 wrote: »
    They continue their advance towards Turkey

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/05/air-strikes-isis-not-working-syrian-kurds

    Who didn't see this coming?

    When will Western governments learn that Islamic extremism will not be stopped in this way?

    Nobody has claimed that western air strikes could/would defeat IS.
  • Options
    TheTruth1983TheTruth1983 Posts: 13,462
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #7
    rusty123 wrote: »
    Nobody has claimed that western air strikes could/would defeat IS.

    What what is the point of them? They don't even appear to be slowing them down.
  • Options
    RaferRafer Posts: 14,231
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #8
    rusty123 wrote: »
    Nobody has claimed that western air strikes could/would defeat IS.

    The claim was that it would halt or at the very least slow them down to buy time for the Kurdish peshmerga and Iraqi army to form up and take them on. So far that doesn't seem to have happened. The Kurds are having some success. The Iraqi army isn't up to much. The airstrikes alone doesn't seem to have slowed isis significantly. All it's done is forced them to disperse into smaller groups.
  • Options
    TheTruth1983TheTruth1983 Posts: 13,462
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #9
    Rafer wrote: »
    The claim was that it would halt or at the very least slow them down to buy time for the Kurdish peshmerga and Iraqi army to form up and take them on. So far that doesn't seem to have happened. The Kurds are having some success. The Iraqi army isn't up to much. The airstrikes alone doesn't seem to have slowed isis significantly. All it's done is forced them to disperse into smaller groups.

    Which any idiot will tell you makes them more difficult to defeat. We do not have a good record against dispersed enemy forces. They will blend into local politicians, plan their attacks, strike, and blend right in again. That's the reason the US lost the Vietnam war so badly.
  • Options
    AdsAds Posts: 37,061
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #10
    If we sent in ground troops it is likely to become another Vietnam - ISIS are well funded and have huge numbers of fighters.Unlike conventional armies, the majority of ISIS fighters would die for their cause.

    That said we do need some sort of ground troops involved - it has to be Arab states sending their troops in IMO. They need to sort this mess out and stop expecting America and the UK to save the day.
  • Options
    rusty123rusty123 Posts: 22,872
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #11
    TheTruth1983 wrote: »
    What what is the point of them?

    Are you seriously asking what the point of an air force is? :confused:
  • Options
    rusty123rusty123 Posts: 22,872
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #12
    Rafer wrote: »
    The claim was that it would halt or at the very least slow them down to buy time for the Kurdish peshmerga and Iraqi army to form up and take them on. So far that doesn't seem to have happened. The Kurds are having some success. The Iraqi army isn't up to much. The airstrikes alone doesn't seem to have slowed isis significantly. All it's done is forced them to disperse into smaller groups.

    Wouldn't a smaller/fragmented group be easier to deal with on the ground?
  • Options
    RaferRafer Posts: 14,231
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #13
    rusty123 wrote: »
    Are you seriously asking what the point of an air force is? :confused:

    You're the first person to use the words "air force" on this thread. Nobody is questioning the point of having an air force. What is in question is how effective the air strikes are.
  • Options
    RaferRafer Posts: 14,231
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #14
    rusty123 wrote: »
    Wouldn't a smaller/fragmented group be easier to deal with on the ground?

    They are not staying dispersed. They disperse while on the move then reform to launch an attack. It gives them the protection from airstrikes and allows them to retain their strength when attacking.
  • Options
    TheTruth1983TheTruth1983 Posts: 13,462
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #15
    rusty123 wrote: »
    Are you seriously asking what the point of an air force is? :confused:

    Air strikes, not an air force.

    I suspect you are being obtuse though.
  • Options
    Fists of FedorFists of Fedor Posts: 786
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #16
    Rafer wrote: »
    They are not staying dispersed. They disperse while on the move then reform to launch an attack. It gives them the protection from airstrikes and allows them to retain their strength when attacking.

    1. Dispersal makes advancing slower.
    2. IIRC - most of the RAF strikes have been against ISIS forces in combat.
  • Options
    rusty123rusty123 Posts: 22,872
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #17
    TheTruth1983 wrote: »
    Air strikes, not an air force.

    I suspect you are being obtuse though.

    Obtuse? Moi?

    If anything I'm inclined to think that particular description best suits your argument.
  • Options
    GroutyGrouty Posts: 34,039
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #18
    Breaking now, Kobane about to fall.
  • Options
    TheTruth1983TheTruth1983 Posts: 13,462
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #19
    Grouty wrote: »
    Breaking now, Kobane about to fall.

    Here's the link http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-29509828
  • Options
    jenziejenzie Posts: 20,821
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #20
    Alan1981 wrote: »
    Why can't Arab Countries sort this out amongst themselves . It's not like they don't have the fire power. Isis are pretty bold at the minute, but if we go in, they will soon be hiding among civilians and we will be dragged into another Afghanistan and we will be blamed for any civilian casualties and the West will be hated even more than we are.

    This is the problem with removing dictators and trying to force some wishy washy style of democracy on people who are not ready for it and probably never will be.

    incompetence and self service would be that answer, they can't do bugger all for themselves ..... look at the massive success of their arab league! </sarcasm>
  • Options
    jmclaughjmclaugh Posts: 63,999
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #21
    The reality is the rest of the countries in the area are unwillingly to commit their own military let alone ground troops to do much about IS. It seems despite all their whinging about Western interference it seems they want their cake and their halfpenny or else don't really care about is going on there.
  • Options
    jzeejzee Posts: 25,498
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #22
    Surprise surprise the Turks aren't helping the Kurds.
  • Options
    AdsAds Posts: 37,061
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #23
    I can only imagine the human rights atrocities that are about to be unleashed on the people of Kobane :(
  • Options
    jzeejzee Posts: 25,498
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #24
    Twin suicide attacks being reported by ISIS in Hasakah killing 30 Kurdish fighters.
  • Options
    misawa97misawa97 Posts: 11,579
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #25
    Ads wrote: »
    I can only imagine the human rights atrocities that are about to be unleashed on the people of Kobane :(

    BS. The Kurds are Sunni Muslims and the civilians will be treated as such.

    You know who was leading the fight for IS in Kobane? kurdish fighters. The battle isnt against the kurdish people it's against the communists.
    Surprise surprise the Turks aren't helping the Kurds.

    You do know the PKK have killed thousands of turks.

    As for the questions of why don't Arab armies deal with it?

    Arab armies do not fight. No way would those soldiers be willing to face IS.
  • Options
    Jellied EelJellied Eel Posts: 33,091
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #26
    misawa97 wrote: »
    BS. The Kurds are Sunni Muslims and the civilians will be treated as such.

    Well, assuming they comply with the Caliph's strict interpretation they'll be ok. If that means life in Syria is much less liberal than it used to be under Assad's 'tyranny', well, that's just the price of progress.
    You do know the PKK have killed thousands of turks.

    Tricky situation for the Turks. Both ISIL and PKK are terrorist organisations, even if dialogue between them and the PKK had been improving. Now Turkey has to manage the fallout from our latest intervention.
    As for the questions of why don't Arab armies deal with it?

    Similar reasons to us. Bodybags aren't good PR. Plus many of the Arab states are still dealing with their Arab Springs and general discontent from the radicals. ISIL's against 'Kingdoms' and may sound appealing to radicals/malcontents who resent the wealth of the Kings and Princes.. But of course the 'Caliph' has his own pyramid scheme to funnel cash in his general direction.
Sign In or Register to comment.